G.O.P. Senators See Politics In Pace of Keating 5 Inquiry

By RICHARD L. BERKE, Special to The New York Times

Published: October 15, 1990

WASHINGTON, Oct. 14—
In rare public criticism of the panel that polices their behavior, several Republican Senators have suggested that the Senate Ethics Committee has let politics interfere with its investigation of five lawmakers for their links to the savings and loan debacle.

Although some Senators had leveled such criticism in private, many now say they are willing to break their public silence because they believe that the committee's failure to act more swiftly has unduly tarnished some lawmakers' reputations as the November elections approach. None of the five Senators under scrutiny are up for re-election this year. But senators in both parties have expressed concerns that a prolonged investigation might needlessly damage the reputation of their colleagues and that of Congress itself.

''Justice delayed is justice denied,'' said Senator Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican who was chairman of the ethics panel from 1983 to 1986. ''The committee as a whole should not be guided by the political calendar.''

'Obligation to Proceed'

Senator Malcolm Wallop, Republican of Wyoming, asserted that the committee ''has an obligation to proceed with deliberate speed, but their speed has been too deliberate.''

The Ethics Committee announced in December that it was examining whether five Senators, Donald W. Riegle Jr. of Michigan, Alan Cranston of California, John Glenn of Ohio and John McCain and Dennis DeConcini, both of Arizona, had improperly intervened with Federal regulators on behalf of Charles H. Keating Jr. At the time, Mr. Keating was the owner of the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association of Irvine, Calif., which was approaching insolvency. Mr. Keating or his associates had contributed a total of $1.3 million to the Senators' campaigns or to groups affiliated with them.

In separate interviews last week, the Republican Senators questioned why the committee of three Democrats and three Republicans had not acted on a confidential recommendation on Sept. 10 of its special counsel, Robert S. Bennett. Congressional officials say the recommendation advised the panel to drop Mr. McCain and Mr. Glenn from the inquiry.

Some Republicans are more open in their criticism of the committee, apparently because Mr. McCain is the only Republican among the five under scrutiny. If he is cleared, Republicans could benefit politically by portraying the scandal as a Democratic one.

Concern About Fairness

Ethics panel members, some of whom have voiced concern in the past about the time-consuming nature of their inquiries, refused to comment on the pace of the Keating case. But they have insisted that the panel was proceeding slowly to assure that the lawmakers are treated fairly.

After receiving Mr. Bennett's report, the committee announced it would meet again separately with all five Senators before acting further. In the last two weeks, the panel has met with Mr. Glenn, Mr. McCain and Mr. DeConcini and is expected to meet this week with Mr. Cranston and Mr. Riegle.

''The committee must study the report of counsel and the exhibits,'' the panel said recently in an unusual public statement. It added that before reaching any decisions ''the committee must give each Senator under investigation the opportunity to be heard by the committee in executive session.''

While they acknowledge that they had not read Mr. Bennett's report, several Republicans contended that the panel had had weeks to review the recommendations and that it should have acted by now.

According to Congressional officials, Mr. Bennett said that there was substantial evidence for the panel to open a full-scale investigation of Mr. DeConcini, Mr. Riegle and Mr. Cranston but that there was not adequate evidence for such an inquiry into the activities of Mr. Glenn and Mr. McCain.

''I think the committee ought to come to a prompt conclusion,'' said Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania. ''It's a matter of basic fairness. I think there's been time enough for a decision. I know that's critical of my colleagues, but that's the way that I feel.''

'It's Not Fair'

Senator Don Nickles, an Oklahoma Republican and chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said: ''It would be terribly unfair to Senators McCain and Glenn if they keep them under the shadow unnecessarily. My hope is that if there are no credible charges against them, they will be released. It's not fair to send them back to their states and have them under the cloud of an investigation for three or four more months. I feel sorry for any of my colleagues who are under that scrutiny unless they really had it coming.''

As a former chairman who knows how the committee operates, Mr. Stevens said he did not accept the argument that the panel needed more time to hear from the five Senators.

''I think they've run out of time,'' he said. ''They're going to do great harm to the ethics process to wait to announce what everyone knows they should have announced by now. These people are out there campaigning for other candidates - they are symbols in their states of the political process.''

Senator John H. Chafee, Republican of Rhode Island, said the reason the committee had taken months to act ''may be more of excessive deliberation and slowness rather than partisanship.'' But he said he had talked with a few of the Senators being investigated and that ''this is just something that is constantly on their mind - it's an attack on their integrity.''

Mr. McCain and Mr. Glenn have indicated they were anxious for the panel to act, but they have not been as openly critical of the Senators who are deciding their fate.

The Republicans warned that their criticism would only intensify if the committee did not act on Mr. Bennett's report before Congress recesses for the elections next month.

''I won't make a political charge at this point,'' Mr. Nickles said. ''But I might if they don't release Senator Glenn and Senator McCain.''